The operational definition of writing, presented by the National Council of Teachers of English, states that writing is the process of selecting, combining, arranging and developing ideas in effective sentences, paragraphs, and, often longer units of discourse. The process requires the writer to cope with a number of variables: (1) Method of development (narrating, explaining, describing, reporting and persuading); tone (from personal to quite formal); (2) form (from a limerick to a formal letter to a long research report); (3) purpose (from discovering and expressing personal feelings and values to conducting the impersonal “business” of everyday life); and (4) possible audiences (oneself, classmates, a teacher, “the world”). (Breland, Hunter M. and Robert J. Jones, (1982). Perceptions of Writing Skill (ETS RR NO. 8247). New York: College Board Publications.)
Leaning to write and to write increasingly well involves developing increasing skill and sensitivity in selecting from and combining these variables to shape particular messages. It also involves learning to conform to conventions of the printed language, appropriate to the age of the writer and to the form, purpose and tone of the message. Beyond the pragmatic purpose of shaping messages to others, writing can be a means of self-discovery, of finding out what we believe, know, and cannot find words or circumstances to say to others. Writing can be a deeply personal act of shaping our perception of the world and our relationships to people and things in that world. Thus, writing serves both public and personal needs of students, and it warrants the full, generous and continuing effort of all teachers. (Breland, Hunter M. and Robert J. Jones, (1982). Perceptions of Writing Skill (ETS RR NO. 8247). New York: College Board Publications.)
When we write we produce meaning for ourselves and others. Writing makes our thoughts visible, changing our thinking into print, allowing us to develop and extend our ideas, thus promoting “higher-order” thinking. In general, the underlying element of all literacy activities, in particular writing, requires, “thinking.” “Since thinking is a crucial part of constructing meaning, classrooms that consistently foster meaning construction through reading and writing will produce better thinkers.” (T. Tierney and Shanahan, 1991).
Research has shown that multi-sensory learning is one of the best methods for teaching thinking skills. It is “graphical ways of working with ideas and presenting information.” (Inspiration 2000) to teach students to clarify their thinking, and process, organize and prioritize new information. Multi-sensory apparatuses and methods of teaching aid students to clarify thinking, reinforce understanding, integrate new knowledge and identify misconceptions.
The actual task of writing causes anxiety and discomfort in a great number of adults, including teachers. They may have never been taught a workable approach to writing or may have been criticized for their efforts. This same discomfort in writing is found in many students. The “writing process,” a sequence of activities (prewriting, drafting, revision, editing, publishing), has been used by teachers in the classroom to teach writing for the past twenty-five years. Accounting for the individual differences in students, teachers have used different modes of writing( shared, guided or cooperative/collaborative, independent) to enhance process writing. Many students, however, continue to struggle with getting their thoughts on paper in an organized, coherent fashion. Reference: (Pennsylvania Literacy Framework 2000).
Recent research and practice have indicated that focusing on what students do as writers, rather than on theory and grammar, results in more effective written communication. Unfortunately, instruction in the writing process often prescribes a simple linear formula: from prewriting (generating and organizing ideas) to writing to postwriting (revising and editing). In reality, all three stages in the process are interactive and recursive. Composing involves a variety of plans and subprocesses that are brought to bear as they are needed (Hillocks, 1986).
Learning to write well is important for all American students. Even though students have varied backgrounds and experiences, the expectation for high performance in writing applies to all. Language arts instruction would welcome an approach to teaching writing that not only teaches how to do the writing process but also how to think through the writing process using multi-sensory apparatuses.
Over the past decade, most states in the continental United States have adopted academic standards which are based on national guidelines in various content areas. These guidelines are the foundation for the curriculum in schools and, in addition, students must reach proficiency in these standards in order to graduate from high school. The Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) 22 Pennsylvania Code, Chapter 4 Regulation-Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening Standards states that the standards provide the targets for instruction and student learning essential for success in all academic areas. The Pennsylvania Academic Standards were designated for all school districts in the commonwealth for Grades 3, 5, 8, and 11 in the areas of language arts and math. Specifically, the standards include 1.1G: Learning to Read Independently; 1.2C: Reading Critically in all Content Areas; 1.3 A,B,F: Reading, Analyzing, and Interpreting Literature; 1.4 A,B,C: Types of Writing; 1.5 A,B,C,D,E,FG: Quality of Writing. The Pennsylvania Department of Education has mandated academic standards in the content areas of reading (written response to literature) and in writing but has provided only abstract guidelines for student achievement in these areas. The Pennsylvania Department of Education provides no concrete, multi-sensory apparatuses and methodology for teaching a metacognitive approach to writing.
The Pennsylvania Department of Education has mandated state school districts (e.g. Coatesville Area School District (CASD) ) use the academic standards in the content areas of reading (written response to literature) and in writing. The Pennsylvania Academic Standards were designated for all school districts in the Commonwealth for Grades 3, 5, 8, and 11 in the areas of language arts and math. It was the responsibility of the CASD standards committee, comprised of teachers in the district, to develop the content standards at all grade levels (K-11) other than those designated by the state academic standards. Coatesville Area School District provides no concrete, multi-sensory apparatuses and methodology for teaching a metacognitive approach to writing.
This problem is reflected also in various publications that attempt to give concrete, multi-sensory tools for teaching writing. “Hamburger Writing”, by Laura Small, is described in the Pennsylvania Parent Connection Kit. According to Small, “The Hamburger Writing Strategy uses the hamburger as a visual to help students with the writing process. This method is appropriate for use with students in grades one to six.” This strategy emphasizes the parts of a paragraph and the essential characteristics of a paragraph but it is a limited, one dimensional abstract and provides no concrete, multi-sensory apparatuses and methodology for teaching a metacognitive approach to writing.
A number of existing works (see references) regarding the “Hamburger Writing Strategy” were located via the internet. Again they are all limited to a one-dimensional abstract whose essential purpose is to enhance the student's progress during the writing process. None of the existing works provided concrete, multi-sensory apparatuses and methodology for teaching a metacognitive approach to writing.
Educational methods which utilize interactive, colored, language art manipulatives are known in the prior art. U.S. Pat. No. 4,907,971 by Ruth L. Tucker describes a method which syntactically categorizes the components of the English language sentences and a schema for showing categories for which any sentence could belong. Morgan D. Benedict, in U.S. Pat. No. 5,013,245, describes a system which depicts a series of interconnecting geometric shapes to represent parts of speech comprising simple sentence patterns. U.S. Pat. No. 5,738,523 by Susan Wagoner describes color-coded manipulatives which identify paragraph themes, represent key sentences within a paragraph and are so ordered as to clearly outline proper sentence sequencing.
The known prior art is grounded in focus on grammatical construction of sentences, paragraphs, and/or stories. To the applicants' knowledge, no method and aids therefore exist which address the use of multi-sensory, concrete apparatuses and methodology for teaching a metacognitive approach to writing.